[MD] The Brujo

[MarshaV]

At 03:35 PM 3/21/2009, you wrote:
>[Marsha]
>And what 'idealism' and 'delusional mysticism' might that be?   Even
>your precious perceptions are mere conceptual constructs.  The eye,
>light, optic nerve and brain are all conventional, conceptual
>constructs.   Is there even one thing that is not dependent on being
>conceptually constructed and established by conventional agreement?
>
>[Krimel]
>The mystic delusion is that somehow one can escape mere conceptual
>constructs.

I wouldn't know.  I've not had an experience like Ms. 
Bolte-Taylor.  I have experienced some mighty strange perceptual 
phenomena, and I do not drink nor was I smoking weed.  Strange enough 
to know the sense organs cannot always be trusted.


>  Being at "one" is no less a conceptual construct than regarding
>sensation as manifold. The problem with idealism is that is has no roots to
>pin it down it is a set of concepts free of sensible restraint. The world is
>all in your head, if you can meaningfully be said to have a head.

The Buddhist concept of the MiddleWay works for me.  You know the 
song: 'First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then 
there is.'   I'm a conventional woman living in a conventional 
world.  But there is an understanding that things are not as they appear.



>However one regards the dependence or independence of one thing on another
>it is a conceptual construct. My argument has always been about the
>flexibility, and power of a particular way of seeing. It is about adopting
>the smallest number of concepts to account for the greatest amount of
>perception. It is a set of concepts that inherently suspicious of
>themselves.

Whatever floats your boat.



>And just for the record what does it mean to say that all things are
>mutually dependant?

If you look into the causes and conditions of a pattern, then their 
causes and conditions, and theirs, and theirs, and theirs,,, you can 
only come to the conclusion that all leads to the net-of-jewels, but 
of course even causes and conditions are empty of inherent existence 
and conceptually constructed.  So...

Or do you mean that self and object are mutually interdependent?  Or 
conventional reality and ultimate reality are mutually 
interdependent?  Or that sq and DQ are mutually interdependent?  Or 
that cause and effect are mutually interdependent?


>  Does your existence in the good old USofA require the
>existence of each individual quark in the Orion nebula?

I never thought about it.


>Does dependence mean
>necessity in your book?


That was interdependent.   I'm not sure what exactly you mean by necessity.


Marsha




.
_____________

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.